This question is similar to a feature request from a week ago, but it's different.


On German Language we currently have problems with good questions being closed "too fast" / "too rigorously" or just "against community majority"

As soon as a question gets a single close-vote it's almost guaranteed to get closed sooner or later. That in itself is not problematic. But now comes the problematic thing:

Some of these questions gain "Leave Open" votes. and not one or maybe two, but four or five. Even then they will get closed, and this is IMO not desirable.

A simple example: The question "How bad is it to mess up noun genders?" has 23 upvotes. This is exceptionally much for German Language. It is currently running through the close-vote-queue as "primarily opinion based".

There are overall 4 close votes (2 via review queue, 1 the initial, 1 at the post itself), and 6 leave open votes. Also notable is, that when the question entered the queue it got 4 leave open votes, before any close-votes were added.

close-vote queue history

On the mentioned previous request, ShadowWizard commented:

Close vote is action made on the question itself, not always through the review system. Leave Open is review only action which was intended from the beginning only to remove the item from review

If I understand that correctly, the Item should be removed from the close-vote queue and have all current close-votes purged.

Did I understand the purpose of close-votes correctly?

What is the threshold for LeaveOpen Votes to clear the review item? Do leave-open votes clear the review item at all?


rereading the second answer to the linked question it seems that 3 Leave Open Votes should remove the item from the VTC Queue. This did not happen here, why?

  • The way I understood it was that "enough" (where I don't know the exact number) leave open votes would remove the question from the review queue.
    – ChrisF Mod
    Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 11:52
  • @gnat accepted. doesn't mean that I'll accept the circumstance that it works that way, but at least I made it more searchable. (on a sidenote, the question is faq-proposed shouldn't it get incorporated somewhen?) Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:16
  • @gnat: that post does not explain why the posts are not being kicked from the queue after 3 'Leave Open' votes. I smell a bug here. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:50
  • @MartijnPieters it does implicitly "if someone visits the question directly and votes to close it, that'll both count toward the 5 votes needed to close it and stall the aging [...]". I assume It also makes the post available in the close-vote queue again. This might be additionally edited, as that is the current behavior as demonstrated by the answer to this question here ;) Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:52
  • @Vogel612: this is not about ageing away the votes. This is about the post being removed from the review queue, which isn't happening here. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:53
  • @Vogel612: and once a post has been removed from the review queue, it should not be re-added. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:53
  • @MartijnPieters is this documented anywhere? because then it definitely smells.. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:54
  • @Vogel612: Ah, I think the post can reenter the queue if all close votes have first aged away. So on the post, vote to close. It goes to the queue, gets booted out again. Wait 4 days as the close vote is aged away. Once back to 0, someone else votes to close again, and then it goes back into the queue. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:55
  • @MartijnPieters as far as I can see, posts are kicked from the queue but get back into it later (likely when something pushes them into there back again): for example, "gender" reviews apparently stop for 5 days. Proof that post wasn't kicked would be link to a single review that would show that; I think that if OP would give us link(s) to all "gender" reviews we would see that things work as designed
    – gnat
    Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:55
  • @gnat this screenshot comprises all history records for "gender" reviews. I verified that by checking back until post start date... Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:56
  • @gnat: yes, if the reviews have a different ID, then it was re-entered. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:56
  • 1
    @Vogel612: we cannot see the URLs; the number in /review/close/<...> will be constant for each run through the queue. If the number changed, it was re-entered. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:57
  • @Vogel612 could you please add to the question link(s) to review(s) on "genders" question? You can get these by clicking "Leave Open" links in the screen shot. I expect that 6 clicks on gender-leave-open would give you at least two different URLs; if these all refer single URL, that would indicate a bug in CV queue. Two would be by design, see: Same question goes through close review queue twice, is that good or bad?
    – gnat
    Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:57
  • 1
    @gnat it's following id's: 5214, 5262. It was reentered. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 14:00
  • 2
    @gnat: yup, it did. The question then is how it is re-entered. When kicked out another close vote doesn't put it back in. But if the votes aged away first, then it all makes perfect sense; a new voting round is started and the post is re-entered again. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 14:03

1 Answer 1


3 Leave Open reviews will remove the item from review, but that doesn't prevent it from entering the review queue again at a later date by a new close vote. This seems to have happened here. (The "Leave Open" links at the bottom should take to a different page than those at the top.)

The Leave Open outcome does not clear existing votes, they stay until the question is closed or the votes age away, and the question can continue to get close votes by users who visit the question.

See these two reviews on the same question on Arqade for example:

  • 1
    That would only happen when the old votes have aged away first, then? Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:54
  • @MartijnPieters That I don't know.
    – 3ventic
    Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 13:56
  • 3
    I think the screenshot certainly suggests that is what happened here. There is about a week between the previous run for the gender question and the re-emergence. Enough time for votes to age away. Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 14:01

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .